« First « Previous Comments 63 - 87 of 87 Search these comments
Strategist saysook closely at your participation rate chart. We hit a new low just before the 2016 election. As soon as Trump won, the trend changed for the better.
Yes, we created a new vaccine when you weren't looking. It's a not so secret formula called "Trump's Tax Cuts"
You're kidding. The tax law didn't take effect until 2018. It cannot possibly explain anything happening in 2016
A concrete agreement never was and never can be expected instantly. You have to wait until the end of the negotiations.
That's incorrect. The demand would be less as prices rose.
Actually it does. It encourages investment which typically creates jobs.
I thought the answer was fairly obvious. The way our tax structure gives breaks to capital investment encourages more investment as taxes are raised. Obviously, if you go to the extreme limit, then other problems are encountered.
At 100% there is no incentive to risk capital and labor if you know all your profits will be confiscated. How does taxing corporations encourage investment? Please explain as it makes no sense.
Oh wait, you are saying that our tax structure is the problem and corporations are incentivised to reinvest their profits instead of letting the profits be taxed. Is this correct?
And if this is correct would it not be better to lower all taxes so that successful companies can decide how to invest their money and create more jobs? Or are you in favor of redistribution and incentivizing people to go on the dole?
Goran_K says
So why not just tax corporations at 100% and creates lots of jobs?
I think trolling is against the rules here.
In Internet slang, a troll (/troʊl, trɒl/) is a person who starts quarrels or upsets people on the Internet to distract and sow discord by posting inflammatory and digressive,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses[2] and normalizing tangential discussion,[3] whether for the troll's amusement or a specific gain.
It's funny. Obama created more jobs in his last 18 months than Trump did in his first 18 months.
LeonDurham saysIt's funny. Obama created more jobs in his last 18 months than Trump did in his first 18 months.
It's funny, why not do it apples to apples, compare Obama's first 18 months to Trumps first 18.
If someone really wanted to compare apples to apples, which they don't, then the 18 months before the inauguration would have to be included to see the trend going into the new presidency.
It's funny, why not do it apples to apples, compare Obama's first 18 months to Trumps first 18.
How much QE has Trump added to economy to get new jobs? Obama added $4 Trillion.
Why @Patrick tolerates trolls like you here is beyond me.
LeonDurham saysI think trolling is against the rules here.
Then why are you still allowed to post?
MrMagic says
It's funny, why not do it apples to apples, compare Obama's first 18 months to Trumps first 18.
How much QE has Trump added to economy to get new jobs? Obama added $4 Trillion.
I thought the point was obvious. All the Trumpkins claim that Trump has done great things for the economy.
Then why are you still allowed to post?
Nope, not obvious, but it will be as soon as you post Obama's numbers from his first 18 months as a comparison...
We'll be waiting...
Are YOU FUCKING SERIOUS? No, really? That was a serious question. Especially since a) things are a helluva lot better no matter how you spin things (or try to) and b) he isn't borrowing TRILLIONS. The new econ stats prove that was a bunch of total crap! Larry Kudlow has been vindicated, pal.
Trump first 18 months -- 3,432K jobs created
Obama last 18 months-- 3709K jobs created
It's funny, why not do it apples to apples, compare Obama's first 18 months to Trumps first 18.
Excellent--could you point to the post that you think is trolling?
Obama had multiple quarters of 4% growth.
But the sheeple somehow still believe that Trump has helped the economy. lol.
Leon, do you see the operative word in that sentence, "first". This is how you do an apples to apples comparison.
A "first" and "last" comparison shows absolutely nothing, except that you're just trolling again and being dishonest.
LOL
« First « Previous Comments 63 - 87 of 87 Search these comments
https://www.thestreet.com/story/14284462/1/corporate-tax-cuts-promote-ceo-pay-raises-and-stock-buybacks-not-jobs.html
"Researchers looked at 92 publicly-held companies that reported a U.S. profit from 2008 to 2015 and paid a federal income tax of less than 20%, the rate proposed by House Republicans, by exploiting loopholes in the current tax code.
The 92 companies examined saw median job growth of negative 1% over an eight-year period, compared to 6% across the entire U.S. private sector. Moreover, half of those firms eliminated jobs during that time, downsizing by a combined total of 483,000 jobs.
At the same time, average CEO pay among the 92 firms rose by 18%, compared to a 13% increase across the entire S&P 500"
But, cutting corporate tax rates would ABSOLUTELY enrich Trump himself. When the Trumpcucks realize that he cares not for the average American. Everything he does, he does for one reason alone. To enrich himself and his family.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-promised-put-american-workers-142940732.html
is another interesting article detailing how Trump has screwed the American worker but helped his businesses.
#MAGA